摘要
刑法的明确性与语言的模糊性、法律的一般性、理性的有限性存在不可回避的冲突,消解这些冲突主要依赖司法明确路径,即构建弹性边界,主要分为两步:第一步,通过形式性解释划分出弹性空间.首先通过文义解释确定底限范围,也就是可能文义的最大范围;然后通过体系解释排除底限范围中不协调的部分,主要有法条内部的不协调部分、法条之间的不协调部分、刑法与其他部门法的不协调部分、刑法与宪法的不协调部分.底限范围排除掉上述不协调的部分就形成弹性空间.第二步,在弹性空间里通过实质性解释划定弹性边界.实质性解释主要依据法益、社会危害性、刑事政策与常识、常理、常情等目的性要素展开.依据犯罪类型的特点提炼出专属的实质性解释规则,即目的性要素将形成适合该犯罪类型特有的优先位序和冲突解决规则,使得实质性解释划定的弹性边界更加明确、清晰.
Abstract
There are unavoidable conflicts between the clarity of criminal law and the vagueness of language,the generality of law,and the finiteness of reason.The resolution of these conflicts mainly depends on the clarification path of justice,that is,the construction of elastic boundaries,which mainly consists of two steps.The first step is to make elastic space through formal interpretation.First,a bottom-line area is determined through the interpretation of the semantics,which constitutes the maximum range of possible semantics.Then,through systematic interpretation,the incongruous parts of the bottom-line area are excluded,mainly including:the incongruous parts within the articles,the uncoordinated parts between the articles,the incongruous part between the criminal law and other branch laws,and the incongruous parts between the criminal law and the Constitution.When the above incongruous parts are excluded from the bottom-line area,an elastic space is formed.The second step is to delineate elastic boundaries through substantive interpretation in elastic space.Substantive interpretations are mainly based on legal benefits,social harm,criminal policy and common knowledge,common sense,common facts and other purposeful elements.According to the characteristics of the types of crime,exclusive substantive interpretation rules are extracted,that is,the elements of purpose will form a priority order and conflict resolution rules suitable for the certain type of crime,so that the elastic boundaries delineated by the substantive interpretation are more clear.
NETL
NSTL
万方数据